How Brexit will affect UK trademarks’ use in the EU


By Paris Hadjipanayis , Lawyer 
The EU Trademark Regulation grants no express benefit to any trademark registered outside the European Union. Effectively, in the post Brexit era, UK national trademarks shall no longer enjoy protection from third-party counterfeiting, passing-off, unauthorized use, and distribution as well as licensing vis a vis exploitation by similarly confusing goods, services and intra-trades within the Union. This is partly because the European Union Intellectual Property Office [EUIPO] holds a database (art.112) via its online platform (eSearch plus) with all filed and registered EU marks for effectuating its checks and controls on a preliminary stage to either grant registration of a mark for the corresponding class of goods and services (as per the Nice Classification) or file an objection and/or reject the application.
What is the tort of passing-off and why registration of a Trademark through EUIPO will become essential to UK holders who deal in the EU post Brexit?
The three fundamental elements of passing off are Reputation, Misrepresentation, and Damage to goodwill. These three elements are also known as the CLASSICAL TRINITY, as restated by the House of Lords in the case of Reckitt & Colman Ltd V Borden Inc. It was stated in this case that in a suit for passing off the plaintiff must establish firstly, goodwill or reputation attached to his goods or services. Secondly, he must prove a misrepresentation by the defendant to the public i.e. leading or likely to lead the public to believe that the goods and services offered by him are that of the Plaintiff’s. Lastly, he must demonstrate that he has suffered a loss due to the belief that the defendant’s goods and services are those of the Plaintiff’s. The Trademark is providing protection to registered goods and services, but the passing off action is providing protection to unregistered goods and services. The most important point is that the remedy is the same in both the cases, but the Trademark is available to only the registered goods and services and passing off is available to unregistered goods and services.
What legal rights and protections are accorded to registered trademarks?
A registered EU trademark bears a presumption of validity unless and until it is invalidated or revoked.
The owner of a registered EU trademark has the right to prevent all unauthorized third parties from using, in the territory of the European Union:
• an identical sign in the course of trade in relation to identical goods and services;
• an identical or similar sign in relation to identical or similar goods and services, if a likelihood of confusion exists (including the likelihood of association); or
• an identical or similar sign, irrespective of whether it is used in relation to identical or similar goods and services, where the EU trademark has a reputation in the European Union and use of that sign without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or repute of the EU trademark. Owners of EU trademarks may also take action against counterfeit goods in transit in the European Union unless the importer can prove that there is no trademark infringement in the country of final destination.
Interestingly enough according to article 22 of the EU Trademark Regulation, a trademark irrespectively of the undertaking may be given as a form of security or be the object of rights in rem. Effectively UK physical or legal entities who hold an EU mark shall also be able to utilize their mark as a form of security in commercial transactions as in any other type of collateral asset. Likewise according to article 25, a proprietor of an EU mark may choose to license (on an exclusive or non-exclusive basis) some or all of the goods and services in all Member States of the EU due to the mark’s pan-EU legal coverage and protection while on the same token a proprietor can be protected from a licensee who contravenes any provision of his licensing contract. To this end, the Union Rules regarding the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters apply to proceedings relating to trademarks (art.122), securing thus fast track legal protection to the proprietor.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that according to article 39, as the UK is still in the EU, a UK trademark proprietor can claim seniority of his existing national registered trademark when applying for the same mark to be registered as an EU trademark. However, once the UK exits the EU, this option shall no longer be available for UK national registrations.
As a conclusive comment, it is fair to say that in the post Brexit era, UK trademark holders who intend to use their marks in the EU when dealing in commercial transactions, will come across multiple legal challenges as their intellectual property rights will be exposed to third-party infringers with severe financial implications. Moreover, due to the Regulation’s harmonization effect, a trademark registered through EUIPO will enjoy protection on an EU level thus avoiding time-consuming and costly litigation proceedings on a national level where the infringement may arise. With this said, whether or not UK nationals and/or legal entities currently have a registered mark on a national level, should take prompt action and file an application to EUIPO for securing protection of their trademark in order to find themselves ready once the UK will exit the EU in the forthcoming months.

Comments

Post a Comment

Editorial

Editorial
George Kazoleas, Lawyer

Top Stories

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld...
Read more

Daily Mail publisher wins case against ‘success fees’ paid to lawyers (ECtHR)

Image
Obligation on publisher of the Daily Mail to pay substantial “success fees" in defamation and breach of privacy cases was excessive. The case Associated Newspapers Limited v. the United Kingdom (application no. 37398/21) concerned the fact that Associated Newspapers Limited the publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday had been obliged to pay extensive costs incurred by claimants who had successfully sued it in privacy and/or defamation proceedings following articles it had published in print or online in 2017 and 2019.  Since one of the claimants had entered into a conditional fee arrangement (CFA) with his legal representative, and both had taken out “after-the-event” (ATE) insurance, Associated Newspapers Limited had been liable not only for their base costs, but also for fee uplifts including the “success fee” in the CFA and for their ATE insurance premiums.  In Chamber judgment (12.11.2024) in the case, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that t...
Read more

ECtHR elects a new Vice-President of the Court and two new Section Presidents

Image
The European Court of Human Rights has elected on 23.9.2024 a new Vice-President of the Court – Judge Ivana Jelić (elected in respect of Montenegro). She will take up her duties on 1 November 2024.  The Court has also elected at the same date two new Section Presidents – Judges Lado Chanturia (elected in respect of Georgia) and Ioannis Ktistakis (elected in respect of Greece). They will also take up their duties on 1 November 2024. Ivana Jelić was born on 17 March 1975 in Podgorica, Montenegro and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 12 July 2018. Lado Chanturia was born on 14 April 1963 in Tsalenjikha, Georgia, was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 January 2018 and is Vice-President of Section since 18 May 2023. Ioannis Ktistakis was born on 3 January 1971 in Thebes, Greece and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 March 2021. (source/photo: echr.coe.int) Read more here
Read more

Intellectual property: the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark

Image
In its Judgment in Case T-82/24 (Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine v EUIPO) (RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F**K YOURSELF) the General Court ruled that the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark. That phrase, which has become a symbol of Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression, is not perceived as an indication of a commercial origin.  The Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine) requests the General Court of the European Union to annul the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 st December 2023, which refused registration of the following figurative sign as an EU trade mark: ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ That mark is a war cry uttered by the Ukrainian border guard on Snake Island on 24th February 2022, the first day of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Registration was sou...
Read more

The banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars

Image
According to the Judgment of the General Court in Cases T-386/21 (Crédit agricole and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission) and T-406/21 (UBS Group and Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) v Commission), the banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars (‘SSA Bonds’).  The General Court of the European Union confirms the Commission’s finding of an infringement and maintains the amount of the fines imposed in 2021. In 2018, the European Commission initiated proceedings for infringement of the competition rules involving Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse (now UBS Group [1] ).  In 2021, the Commission found that those banks had entered into an agreement on the secondary market for suprasovereign, sovereign and agency bonds denominated in dollars (SSA bonds). According to the Commission, traders employed by ...
Read more

European Ombudsman asks Commission to publish details of its handling of senior staff move to law firm

Image
The European Ombudsman has asked the European Commission to publish details about how it has handled the planned move by a former director in its competition department to the Brussels office of a US corporate law firm as a partner. Any restrictions that have been placed on the activities of the former director to mitigate potential conflicts of interest should be made public without delay, said the Ombudsman. She noted that public information about the move came from the law firm and gives the impression that the Commission has allowed a senior official to work for a company that anticipates major benefits from their inside knowledge.  The Ombudsman also noted that the Commission declined to give details about the individual’s professional experience despite the fact that the law firm itself has put out a press release detailing it. The Ombudsman has previously criticised a tendency in the EU administration to underestimate the potential negative effects of staff moves to th...
Read more

A national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law (ECJ)

Image
In its Judgment of 26.9.2024 in Case C-792/22 (Energotehnica) the Court of Justice ruled as regards the right to an effective remedy that a national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law. In such a case, the national court may not be penalised.  Following the death of an electrician by electrocution during a maintenance operation, an administrative procedure was initiated against his employer. At the same time, criminal proceedings for negligence and manslaughter were initiated against the supervisor. The victim’s next of kin also became civil parties to the criminal proceedings.  The administrative court hearing the dispute concluded that the present case did not involve an ‘accident at work’. It annulled the administrative penalties imposed on the employer. According to national legislation, as interpreted by the Romanian Constitutional Court, that administrative decision prevents the criminal court from reconsidering whe...
Read more